How 'situational' is judgment in situational judgment tests?

Whereas situational judgment tests (SJTs) have traditionally been conceptualized as low-fidelity simulations with an emphasis on contextualized situation descriptions and context-dependent knowledge, a recent perspective views SJTs as measures of more general domain (context-independent) knowledge. In the current research, we contrasted these 2 perspectives in 3 studies by removing the situation descriptions (i.e., item stems) from SJTs. Across studies, the traditional contextualized SJT perspective was not supported for between 43% and 71% of the items because it did not make a significant difference whether the situation description was included or not for these items. These results were replicated across construct domains, samples, and response instructions. However, there was initial evidence that judgment in SJTs was more situational when (a) items measured job knowledge and skills and (b) response options denoted context-specific rules of action. Verbal protocol analyses confirmed that high scorers on SJTs without situation descriptions relied upon general rules about the effectiveness of the responses. Implications for SJT theory, research, and design are discussed

Test Boredom: Exploring a Neglected Emotion

The emotion of boredom has sparked considerable interest in research on teaching and learning, but boredom during tests and exams has not yet been examined. Based on the control-value theory of achievement emotions, we hypothesized that students may experience significant levels of boredom during testing (“test boredom”; H1), and that test boredom may be significantly related to theoretically hypothesized antecedents (control and value appraisals; H2) and outcomes (performance; H3). We further hypothesized that test boredom was more detrimental when students felt overchallenged during the test than when they felt underchallenged (‘abundance hypothesis’; H4). We tested these hypotheses in two studies (Study 1: N=208 8th graders; 54% female; Study 2: N=1,612 5th-10th graders, 47% female) using both trait and state measures of test boredom in mathematics and their proposed antecedents and outcomes. In support of H1, participants reported statistically significant levels of boredom during tests. Further, the relations of test boredom with its control and value antecedents (i.e., being over- or underchallenged, facets of value) were in line with our assumptions (H2). In support of H3, test boredom was significantly negatively related to academic achievement (grades). In line with H4, test scores were negatively related to boredom due to being overchallenged but unrelated, or even positively related, to boredom due to being underchallenged. Directions for future research on test boredom as well as practical implications are outlined